Dog behaviour on walks and the effect of use of the leash

Is this really necessary?

Carri Westgarth, Robert M. Christley, Gina L. Pinchbeck, Rosalind M. Gaskell, Susan Dawson, John W.S. Bradshaw

Dog behaviour on walks and the effect of use of the leash

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 125, Issues 1–2, June 2010, Pages 38–46

Abstract

This paper describes how often pet dogs interact with other dogs, people and the environment, whilst being walked. Such interactions may involve aggression or the transmission of infectious disease. We also assessed the effect of the use of a leash as a modifier of these outcomes. In study one, the behaviour of pet dogs being walked in popular public walking areas was observed (286 observations). Interactions with people were much rarer than interactions with dogs. Multivariable modelling suggested that percentage duration spent sniffing the ground was associated with the UK Kennel Club Breed Type, and whether the dog was observed urinating. Gundogs were observed to sniff more than other breed types. In study two, dogs (n = 10) were filmed twice walking along a pre-defined route, alternately once on leash and once off leash, in order to assess the effects of leash use on interactions between the subject dog and any other dog or person encountered. Multilevel modelling suggested that if either dog was on the leash, then the likelihood of an interaction with a dog occurring was reduced. There was no evidence for statistical interactions between these variables, therefore the effect of the leash on one dog did not seem to be influenced by whether the other dog was on or off leash. We conclude that in circumstances where interactions need to be prevented, such as to reduce spread of infectious diseases during an outbreak, both dogs should be leashed.

Ecological behavior of free-ranging urban pet dogs

Hildy D. Rubin, Alan M. Beck

Ecological behavior of free-ranging urban pet dogs

Applied Animal Ethology, Volume 8, Issues 1–2, January 1982, Pages 161–168

Abstract

This study details the basic ecological behaviors of activity, range and social interaction of 15 individual pets that are permitted varying degrees of freedom to roam without human supervision. The degree of restraint provided by the owner significantly influences the pet's range and interaction with people and other dogs. Pets that are provided with no supervision behave more like un-owned strays than those that are only occasionally permitted to run free.

Knowledge that pet dogs roam more extensively the more time they are kept unrestrained may encourage dog owners actively to confine their pets and obey leash laws. That is, control laws will appear less arbitrary and more consistent with the best interests of the community. In addition, the relatively small ranges of pets that are only occasionally permitted freedom may be utilized by animal-control personnel as a management tool; it is more efficient to coax an animal back home, rather than capture it in the hopes it will be retrieved by the owner.

Eliminatory behaviour of domestic dogs in an urban environment

James B. Reid, David F. Chantrey, C. Davie

Eliminatory behaviour of domestic dogs in an urban environment

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 12, Issue 3, April 1984, Pages 279–287

Abstract

Although dogs are valuable, indeed essential, members of society, they sometimes cause problems of an aesthetic, environmental or public health nature arising from their eliminatory habits. To identify which kinds of dog are more likely to be responsible for these problems, defaecation and urination by domestic dogs under varying degrees of human control were studied in the field. Observations were made between February 1980 and November 1981 in 2 streets, 2 landscaped parks and 2 large rough grass areas. The dogs most likely to defaecate in these public places were those who were accompanied by their owner, but not restricted by being on a lead. There was also an inverse correlation between the number of visits made by dogs on a lead to, and faeces density in, the study sites. Generally, the dogs responsible for most urination were discovered to be those off rather than on a lead, males rather than females, and pedigree males rather than mongrel males. Explanations of these findings, and suggestions for minimising dog fouling of the environment, are offered.